5 comments about The JFK Assassination Debates: Lone Gunman Versus Conspiracy.

1. Michael Kurtz is to be commended for delivering a fantastic overview of the JFK assassination case at this late juncture (2006). Of most value are Kurtz's personal interviews with sundry medical personnel and even three former Secret Service agents: Roy Kellerman (deceased 1984; I spoke/ corresponded with his widow June), William Greer (deceased 1985; I spoke to his son Richard), and Robert Bouck (deceased 2004; I spoke to Bouck 9/27/92). I am on 3 pages of this book. Get it!!!



2. The chapter on the intelligence community does not go into the CIA but Castro. This is a trick lawyers use. Everyone did it but my client. The CIA is out there looking for the real killers along with O.J.



3. Professor Kurtz complied a book of essays in which he compared and contrasted conspiracy theories and the official mythology. What was missing was the scholarship that one would expect from a professor of his standing.
   
   I was expecting an analytical critique of conspiracy theories' and the offical mythology's critical themes. It was not there. The assassination debate was the equivalent dialogue between bar patrons. Both sides remained basically unchallenged because neither could cite the documntary basis for their positions, the documentary basis being the foundation for academic scholarship. What a pity that I was duped into buying a book based on the author's credentials that were not in evidence.



4. A unbiased book that offers both sides of the JFK debate and the supporting evidence for each, sounds great right? And things are rolling along pretty smoothly until Kurtz can't resist wedging in his nonsensical viewpoint in a chapter hilariously "consensus", which is filled with misleading statements("There's no proof whatsoever the rifle was fired that day". No such test exists), ridiculous standards of proof("Nobody photographed the bullet on the governor's stretcher"), supposed scientific findings with no no citations, and outright omissions of fact(Kennedy's head snapping forward). Kurtz'z allegations are seemingly devoid of the recognition that basic extension of logic entailing them leads invariably to oblivion. Hilariously, although Kurtz is disturbed by the lack of proof of CE 399 actually being found on Governor Connally's stretcher, he seems untroubled by his own assertion that it is "unknown" what happened to the bullets that were "undoubtedly" fired at President Kennedy from the front.
   
   Do not swallow the disingenuous "detached and unbiased" hook. This book is simply another in a large stack of conspiracy nonsense.



5. The idea behind 2006's "JFK: The Assassination Debates" seems valuable and overdue: A comparison of viewpoints regarding the murder of President Kennedy, between those who believe Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone and those who don't. A shame it winds up being a repetitive, simplistic explanation of the author's point of view, with some worthwhile points lost amid the clutter.
   
   Author Michael L. Kurtz explains his view at the beginning that there was a conspiracy, but that his own view has shifted. He isn't trying to make up anyone's mind, he says, but offer "a solid basis of information upon which...they can make up their own minds."
   
   There are two chapters that seem to take this approach, one presenting the established lone-gunman view and the other being a sort of generic conspiracy viewpoint, about which Kurtz notes there are many tangents. Kurtz doesn't push his particular view here, and does a fair job establishing both positions.
   
   The rest of his book is less successful. Abandoning the "two-sides" approach which would seem to be the basis for the book's title, he offers his reasoning for disputing the official story.
   
   At times, he does a good job, too, especially when noting the conflicting stories regarding the condition of the President's head when his body reached Parkland Hospital. It's true he doesn't prove anything, but he raises questions regarding why the shattered skull seen on the Zapruder film didn't turn out so shattered when it lay on an operating table some minutes later.
   
   Kurtz makes his best points with the Zapruder film, finding fault in this respect with both lone-gunman supporters and the harder-core conspiracy believers. Why does Kennedy's head fly backward if he was shot from behind, while footage of other such headshots shows the victim falling in the direction from which the bullet was shot? If the Zapruder film was actually tampered with, as some conspiracists now claim, why wouldn't it have been done in a way to make a shot from the rear seem more probable?
   
   As a person who believes Oswald acted alone, I found Kurtz's viewpoint occasionally challenging and worthwhile. But he kept returning to make the same points chapter after chapter, sometimes within the same chapter. He doesn't mention key points like Kennedy's back brace, and diminishes others like the fact the doctors at Parkland Hospital in the first minutes after the shooting were less interested in establishing a clear evidentiary path than in saving the life of a president.
   
   He never adequately explains Oswald in the larger context of things. He's willing to allow Oswald probably shot Officer J.D. Tippit less than an hour after the president was hit, and may have shot at Kennedy as well, just that he wasn't alone or responsible for the killing hit. But who was he, and why is he at the center of every theory, often conflicting, that Kurtz expounds upon? Was he really a traitor, helping the Soviets shoot down a U-2 spy plane? Was he played as a patsy by right-wing conspirists, as New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison claimed?
   
   Kurtz calls Garrison's investigation flawed but wants to chew over the notion that he was following a worthy trail, of midnight meetings and a mysterious office at 544 Camp Street, an address he frequently repeats as "the infamous 544 Camp Street address" or "the notorious 544 Camp Street" in case you don't get the point that something pretty bad went down there. Kurtz offers a lot of eyewitness testimony in this regard, including his own, but what he presents boils down to Garrison's original case. If Garrison was a bad investigator, doesn't this all constitute fruit from the poisoned tree?
   
   Reviewing a book for what it isn't is bad sport, but it feels like "The JFK Assassination Debates", by not living up to its title as a sort of side-by-side comparison of viewpoints regarding key elements of the assassination, misses the mark as a noteworthy contribution to a crowded field.

5 comments about Like A Man.

1. This is an exciting book as real as the events it tells about. Like A Man begins at a very high level where the wartime mission is conceived and leads us through the turmoil of give-and-take espionage on the streets. Almost everything that can go wrong does for the two men who are told to carry out the assassination against all odds. That they did is a tribute to their courage. Chacko gets us on the ground from the first parachute jump and keeps us there all the way to the furious end.



2. LIKE A MAN is a first-rate read and a great piece of historical writing. The wartime atmosphere, the importance of the mission, two dedicated commandos, and well-drawn supporting characters, including Churchill, Hitler, Himmler, Heydrich, along with many members of the WWII underground, make for a fascinating picture of men under orders to do the impossible. They did it, and their story is one for the ages.



3. LIKE A MAN is a stirring book that keeps coming until the last page plus two. A real mission performed by real people becomes in David Chacko's hands a well-wrought tale of action and suspense. Anthropoid (which probably means "like a man") was a team that parachuted behind German lines into Occupied Territory. Their mission was to assassinate the man who coordinated--and usually ran--the most terrible Nazi policies of brutality and extermination. History remembers him, but would remember much better if he had lived to fulfill his destiny as Hitler's successor. That he did not is a tribute to these two men, who were eventually joined by a third man as they entered the wartime underground, disappearing from the Gestapo radar until it was time to surface and close out their mission. When they do, the facade of Nazi Germany invincibility is shattered in bursts of violence that are meant to terrorize. Instead, the outrage it inspired fed the Allied war effort. All the large historical figures are here to give background and tastes of their character--Churchill, Hitler, Himmler--but the men who took their mission to its end against the longest odds are the ones who should be remembered. They were men and this is Like a Man.



4. This book gives you a good feel for what it must be like to drop behind the lines, try to blend in, and carry out resistance operations. It moves right along, not too fast or slow, and builds to the tragic climax. If you like WW II fiction this is a book for you.



5. I ordered three of this author's books and have to say I am not a fan. I found the writing flat and uninteresting. The story idea is better than the actual story. I would not recommend these books.

5 comments about Kill Zone: A Sniper Looks at Dealey Plaza.

1. This book is a sniper's look at the assassination and the scene.
   Mr.Roberts theory of "crossfire" or "triangulation of fire" is excellent,especially considering his military experience.
   I think he may be correct about the location of the hit teams.
   Were the hit teams made up of a Corsican assassin and a member of ZR/Rifle? The author isn't the only writer that has offered that theory.
   Craig Roberts theory about what happened to the President's body aboard Air Force 1 is intriguing! His investigation into the aircraft and strange activity related to the flight was good also.
   
   What is debatable is the identity of those responsible for the murder.
   It seems most likely that the mafia was working with the CIA to committ the crime with J.Edgar Hoover working for the mafia to cover it up.
   
   This book is worth reading for the insight offered by the author considering his experience and knowledge.



2. This book is definitely for the Kennedy addict. It is riveting and spellbinding. I could not put it down. Craig Roberts gives a historical background that expands more than 230 years. His explanations are clear, concise and very believable. He spells out exactly who orchestrated John Kennedy's assassination and the reasons behind it, both of which most people have never heard before. Every American should read this book because the entity responsible for Kennedy's death is alive and well and still operating without impunity within the U.S. government. You will not be disappointed.



3. I have been researching the JFK assassination since it happened and I have to tell you that if I were to compile a book of information pertaining to the assassination this would have been the book I would have written.
   It is absolutely packed with info that we basically knew and then some that we really didn't know.
   It is very well written and answers a multitude of questions that needed to be answered, no wonder the world will never know the truth about this and other things in world history that for the most part just gets brushed aside.
   If you really want or need to know the truth then this is the book for you!



4. I will just quote from the book itself:
   ""How in the world could anyone look at that {Zapruder} film and say that the fatal head strike had come from the rear? The so-called experts who stated that the rearward jerk of Kennedy's head was due to 'muscle reaction,' 'jet force from an erupting bullet' or some other violation of the laws of physics, had obviously never served in combat, where witnessing high-velocity bullet strikes was commonplace..."
   
   "Some of the supporters of the Warren Commission...stated that the bullet came from the rear because the eruption of brain matter and blood came out of the front of the president's skull. I saw something else. In a head shot, the exit wound, due to the buildup of hydrostatic pressure, explodes in a conical formation in the down-range direction of the bullet. Yet in the Zapruder film, I could plainly see that the eruption was not a conical shape to the front of the limo, but instead was an explosion that cast fragments both up and down in a vertical plane, and side to side in a horizontal plane. There was only one explanation for this: an exploding or 'frangible' bullet. Such a round explodes on impact--in exactly the manner depicted in the film."
   
   A seasoned veteran (sniper) of the Vietnam war stood at the `snipers-nest' and released it was all a lie; nuff said.



5. Immediately upon reading this book I knew in my heart that the author had hit upon a highly probable answer to the question that has been lurking in the minds of millions since that dreadful day in Dallas. Now I am not going to go into specifics in this review, rather I am going to relate in my own way why I think the author is right and I would encourage you to get a copy of this book and read it and form your own opinion.
   
   If you look at a magician, his primary purpose is not to entertain you with feats of magic, but more along the lines of deceiving you into believing that which he (the magician) presents to you as the truth and in doing so, makes you believe that which he wants you to believe. Actually I guess a better way of saying it is that the magician presents his deception to you in such a way that your subconscious convinces your consciousness to believe wholeheartedly in that which was presented to you by the magician. Now I know that this seems to be way of course with the subject matter of this review, but trust me, it is actually dead on.
   
   Now we all know that a certain group, or collection, of individuals was responsible for the death of Kennedy. Now do we know for certain who they were and their names? No, but we do know that they did exist and I am sure that some of them may still be alive to this day, although the longer that time passes the greater the probability that they will expire from old age without every being tried for their crimes, at least as we know it.
   
   Now if your ultimate goal is the eradication of a certain person, it really doesn't matter to you how that eradication takes place, or who does it, as long as the goal is accomplished. Of course you wouldn't want any of it traced back to you, which is why you want to have someone else do it. Or better yet, have someone else do it with a motive so far removed from your own that the odds of anyone even remotely suspecting you would be likened to the proverbial needle in a haystack and someone that will kill the person for you without even knowing that they did. All the time thinking that they were killing that person for their own reasons. Now to better enhance your chances of never being suspected, let's multiply that by several times and you now have a smokescreen of epic proportions with the finger pointing at several different organizations or persons with each one having a slightly different motive. None of which are even close to your own. See the beauty of it already?
   
   In law enforcement there is an old saying that goes something like this, "If you want to find out who did it, follow the money." And that is exactly what the author does.
   
   Let's look at the most common theories on who was responsible for killing Kennedy. Please take note that I did not say who killed Kennedy, but who was responsible for killing Kennedy. Remember what I said earlier about getting someone else to do it for you.
   
   1. Lee Harvey Oswald - acting alone RIDICULOUS
   2. The Mafia - NOPE
   3. The CIA - NOPE
   4. The Cubans - NOPE
   5. The Russians - NOPE
   6. Aliens from outer space - I KNOW REALLY RIDICULOUS, BUT AREN'T THE OTHERS JUST AS BAD!
   
   Now I am not implying that some of these didn't have a role in it, I am just saying that they are not responsible for it. Who is? Well purchase this book and read it. I believe that if you do that, this book will more than answer that question.
   
   All of those people and/or groups listed are merely the smoke, and you all know that where there's smoke there's fire, and this book shows you the fire.

5 comments about The Zenith Secret: A CIA Insider Exposes the Secret War Against Cuba and the Plots that Killed the Kennedy Brothers.

1. As others have noted, the size of the print is a problem, to the point that for me at least it was difficult, nearly painful, to read. If I weren't so interested in the topic I'd have never purchased the book due to the print size. It would have been better to cut some of the unnecessary verbage and increase the font.
   
   I'm extremely puzzled by the author's identification of Gordon Campbell as the individual (from Veciana's description) drawn as Bishop for the HSCA. To my knowledge only one photo of Campbell exists, and it is the one the author refers to in his book--that appeared on the video that was available on the BBC in November 2006--if in fact that was Campbell. To me if that was Campbell, or if that person looked anything like the real Campbell, he doesn't look anything like the HSCA drawing of Bishop. Which makes me wonder about Ayers' other identifications.
   
   Ultimately, the author really doesn't know any new details about the JFK case (although he may be correct about some of those involved), but his description of his involvement in the anti-Castro activities in the 1960s is worthwhile to those interested in every available tidbit about that, but be prepared to strain your eyes to be able to read about it.
   
   I was looking forward to this book, but it disappoints, mainly due to the lack of any real evidence cited.



2. I am 2/3's the way thru Bradley Ayers' excellent book, "The Zenith Secret". Interesting in itself, its 2006 edition by VoxPop (voxpopnet.net) using a mainland Chinese book publishing company (probably cost-effective). A sign of the future for independent book publishing in America?
   
   Bradley happened to be in a unique and pivotal point of the secret history that took place in the USA in the early to late 1960's, and his observations on the assassinations of the Kennedys and MLK was on the mark. His backgound as an Army officer and CIA operative in that period makes his viewpoints all the more believeable.
   
   The book is well-written. He states that US commissioned officers in the Army are prohibited from keeping a diary, but he seems to have organized those events in detail that makes it apparent he has a outstanding memory or he perhaps secretly kept some his notes away from the authorities, for future reference.
   
   This is perhaps explained in the paragraph on page 158:
   
   "...Because I had nothing to work from, to reconstruct my account, it had to come from memory correlated to work with my accumulation of routine records, receipts, flight logs, letters and other personal documents that would helpt pin down times, places, people and events."
   
   In any event, he has done a great service to the people of the US for his history of a dark age in our country. I rank his contributions in the JFK assassination genre right there on the level of what Col. Prouty has done, and I would not be surprised if the dear Colonel could have agreed with me on this assessment.
   
   [...]



3. Captain Ayers is the primary researcher of the life and career of career CIA rambo David Morales. This alone makes The Zenith Secret a must read for anyone interested in understanding how the American republic was put to sleep in the postwar era by its patriots. The evidence re complicity of Senator Barry Goldwater is clearly presented; one may draw one's own conclusions. Googling "newcombat" and "bradley e. ayers" leads to a discussion of the book in the context of the current debate as to whether Morales and another CIA officer whom Ayers knew well -- Gordon Campbell -- were present in the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles the evening that Robert Kennedy was murdered.



4. This book is written in fine print which means that reading the book is like reading only the "legal notices" or disclaimers on a website. So if your eyesight isn't 20/20, forget it.
   The info on the secret war against Cuba is good, but the idea of who killed the Kennedy bros. lack any kind of evidence.
   I'm quite disappointed with this book.



5. I was one of the people involved (at the very end stages) with this book. I had a short while to look at it (in all its minuscule type-face) for the publisher as it was being prepared for print. I'm truly delighted that it has made its way into the big, wide world and appears to be doing so well. However, I would like to share what little inside information I have about the book and its intentions. I read that some are disapointed with the conspiracy theory element to the book. If I remember correctly, the author wasn't really focusing on providing a conspiracy theory account exactly. This is the story of one man's inadvertent involvement in a much larger and complex set of circumstances. It's a memoir on the surface, which is why he describes the breakdown of his marriage, his girlfriends, etc. If you read between the lines, though, you realize that he was witnessing history and this book is his heartfelt effort to recount what it was he experienced as a CIA insider.
   
   If you're looking for a down-and-out conspiracy theory text, then you may or may not like this book. But if you take this book as you find it, without having too many preconceived notions about what secrets it should be giving away, you will probably really enjoy it!

3 comments about Alias Paine: Lewis Thornton Powell, the Mystery Man of the Lincoln Conspiracy.

1. Without question this is the best researched study of one of John Wilkes Booth's main co-conspirators ever written.



2. Lewis Paine was a dashing young man in the 19th Century. Why would Booth tempt Lewis Paine into kidnapping Mr. Lincoln? I liked Lewis Paine since I was little. Now that I'm 20 yrs old now, I still dream of him. I know he's dead already. (Don't think I'm insane for this guy.) If Lewis Paine was like he was in the 1860's today, I'll freak out. My husband's name is Lewis but not Powell. I have collected several pics of Powell since I was 12 to 13. I drove my mom & dad crazy about Lewis Paine when I was 9. Hope you like my thoughts about Lewis Paine.

   Love, Carmen




3. I purchased this book for my husband whose great great great Uncle was Lewis Thornton Powell. It has a lot of family history that we did not really know about. His mother signed the inside of book for her grandchildren. We love history!!!!!!!!!!!

5 comments about American Assassination: The Strange Death Of Senator Paul Wellstone.

1. "American Assassination: The Strange Death of Senator Paul Wellstone" expands the report filed by the NTSB with the information received from eyewitnesses, U.S. government log files, local government reports and interviews with people related to those who died in the crash. Using this information and deductive reasoning/logic to sort through the gathered evidence, the authors display their conclusion: Wellstone, his family and friends, and the pilots were killed through sabotage. Conspiracy theories generally don't hold my interest too long unless there's proof, but I found this book to be well-written and strong in the use of logic. The book was extremely interesting to me, as I had suspected that the Senator's death by plane crash (another plane crash death) to be very peculiar, to a very suspicious degree. Read the book with an open mind, and see what kind of death you believe this to be.



2. I am Four Arrows, the lead author of this book.(See also my newest text from the Univesity of Texas, "Unlearning the Language of Conquest: Scholars Expose Anti-Indianism in America).
   I recently read Abruzzese's review and find it to be fairly on target, in spite of its negativity. I'm at least happy he recommended that people read it "as a starting point," for this is all we intended it to be. We express state that the questions, inconsistencies and logic of our arguments should be sufficient for a more in-depth investigation.
   As for the book being too short, our motive for writing this book was to get it published before the 2004 presidential elections in hopes that it would at least offer a prima facia case sufficient to raise the kind of questions that MIGHT dissuade people to vote for Bush. We only had a few short months to turn the "new evidence" that sparked our writing the book to get in published in time. Perhaps such hopes were unwarranted in spite of rigged elections and an relatively apathetic, hegemonized public, but it was our long-shot hope nonetheless.
   In our book we have some substantial "evidence" from interviews and analysis, but mostly we simply show enough inconsistencies and provide enough motive to make a good enough case to stimulate further investigation, which we ALMOST got from Senator Barbara Boxer, who has a copy of the book.
   I agree that some of the language about JFK comparisons and "scientific rigor" were unnecessary, but three people being involved with the content, such things, as unfortunate as they might have been to our message, might be persuasive for other readers. In any case, the bottom line is there needs to be further investigations and on this Abruzzese agrees.
   In our new book from Elsevier, "The Hidden History of 9/11," I think this reviewer would find more "evidence" but still realize that it as well is a call for more investigation.
   For example, how can "we" continue to ignore all of the testimony relating to bombs going off in the WTC or to the physics of falling buildings?
   At any rate, it is past time to allow a fear of being a "conspiracy theorist" keep us from discussing the probability that our corporation, military and government institutions have reached a point where assassinations, false flag operations and rigged elections must be taken seriously as a fact of life.
   Four Arrows, aka Don Trent Jacobs



3. This book for me was very good. There seems to be some "connecting of the dots" with other topics during a certain administration and other 'strange occurences'. Not a conspiracty theorist, but some things are more than obvious.



4. I read this book primarily because I wanted to be able to dismiss in my own mind any questions about the death of this amazing man. Growing up in an era when so many of the rich and famous had died in light planes, I was predisposed to accept it as an unforseeable tradgedy. I also felt compelled to listen with an open mind to other possibilities.
   
   Before I read this book, I was unaware of the number of light plane crashes involving key House and Senate members, paticularly those up for reelection. You would think that such an event would merit a close examination by a trusted apolitical agency, particularly when the death is of a potential Presidential candidate such as Senator Wellstone. The author details several fatal crashes that tipped the balance (or prevented a change in) the House or Senate.
   
   I've long been aware that the FAA has often been subject to political staff changes when key investigations arise. It is an agency easily manipulated by swift changes in top level appointments (see Egal Krough overnight appointment by Nixon after the questionable death of Dorothy Hunt). This may be due to PR concerns, not cover-ups, but it is a potential problem in high profile cases. Many questions are raised here about the lackluster NTSB investigation, and the almost immediate FBI presence of large numbers of agents...The FBI does not have dozens of agents prowling farm country waiting for plane crashes. Where did they come from? The authors demonstrate that the official investigations are obvious rubber stamps that leave troubling questions that were clearly ignored.
   
   If someone told you that one of these pilots had been a fight trainer for a 9/11 hijacker, you would not believe it...but the book clearly documents this as a fact, which can easily be confirmed by anyone. The details of the crash, officially always attributed to snow, are far more complex, as many reliable sources, includibg the tower, connsidered it a negligible factor.
   
   The authors postulate EMP interference with the aircraft, which is something I was only vaguely aware of, but it is a difficult charge to prove. I was most puzzled at the odd connection between a 9/11 hijacker and the co-pilot...a very strange connection that I've never seen mentioned in mainstream media, yet is very well documented here. The connection may be simply a coincidence, but deserves mention if only to dispel suspicion.
   
   Overall, this book made me aware that there ARE questions about this event that Senator Wellstone's legacy requires be answered. Don't dismiss this book as some crackpot conspiracy tome, as I almost did. If ANY of the facts related here are true, then they must be resolved and put to rest, otherwise the tide of distrust in our government wiill continue to rise.



5. In "American Assassination" authors Jim Fetzer and"Four Feathers" alledge that Senator Paul Wellstone was the victim of a government orchestrated assassination...They make these allegations because,firstly,they are by thier own admission,conspiracy advocates,citing(in this volume alone)thier belief that the murder of JFK,the TWA 800 crash,united flight 93,and a host of other incidents ALL are government orchestrted incidents and/or incidents in which the"true"facts have been"covered up"..For this reason ALONE I would have to doubt thier notions..Secondly thier "evidence" while interesting,and certainly worthy of further study,is all circumstantial..Few cases are ever won in a courtroom based SOLELY on circumstantial evidence ..
   Finally,it is evident that neither author trusts the government of the united states to give the american public an accurate daily weather report,much less the"true facts" regarding some controversial incident such as this one..Bias dilutes objectivity,and the clear anti-government bias demonstrated in this book makes the"findings" here suspect.

No comments about High Treason: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy : What Really Happened.

2 comments about The Kennedy Assassination.

1. Peter Knight's scholarly book is surprisingly comprehensive given that it's a relatively short work. It succeeds in being both a fine introduction to the case and in being an incisive and fascinating history of the assassination in both American and World history and indeed in popular culture. The book provides an interesting and very reasonable and balanced assessment of most of the key aspects of the case - a summary of the Warren Report and all other official investigations, the major conspiracy theories, the problems with eye witness reliability, the so called problems with the Single Bullet Theory, the fatal head shot and issues with the flawed autopsy and so on.
   
   But the book goes much further than providing a brief but very succinct history of the case, it also provides an excellent record of key works on the assassination together with some highly interesting observations regarding the event in news, fiction, film and even art. More over the author also finds the space to explain how and why the event has had such an impact on modern America and suggests that actually some degree of exaggeration has occurred in respect of the events true impact at the time. The book also examines the concept of the "conspiracy theory" in principle and asks if the Kennedy assassination has in fact changed the nature of conspiracy thinking giving some considerable thought to Oliver Stone's film JFK and the unfortunate effect that that film has had - that a significant percentage of the American public believe Oliver Stones work to be an accurate rendition of the event, which it clearly is not.
   
   It is actually quite rare to get a book on this subject that is essentially neutral, but still maintains a tantalizing glimpse into what author Vincent Bugliosi calls a "bottomless pit". When you consider that Peter Knight covers just about every angle on this case in some 180 pages, it is quite an achievement. If you are conspiracy buff I'd recommend this book as a dose of common sense. Peter Knight doesn't offer a personal conclusion in terms of was there or was there not a conspiracy, but its clear the author's intention was to provide a thorough assessment of the event and its place in history from 1963 to date in a resoundingly non sensationalist manner - frankly a breath of fresh air when you consider the utter none sense that has been written about the case.
   
   Whilst the author is critical of the Warren Commission in respect of its failure to clarify and set to rest a good many of what would become perceived "unanswered questions", I rather suspect he believes Oswald acted alone, but that conclusion is not the aim of the book, its rather to educate the reader and bring some degree of common sense into a subject that has now been somehow lost into such a huge body of work that its almost impossible for any one, bar the dedicated student of the case, to make some degree of semblance as to what happened when Kennedy was shot and to understand the difference between the event itself and what it has become in popular culture - something far greater, far more reaching than it was. The style of writing is engaging and almost humerous at times. A resounding accomplishment - it joins some four hundred books on the subject in my collection and I would place it high high on the my list of recommended reading.



2. The Kennedy assassination has spawned its own conspiracy industry. Aptly described as a "bottomless pit", it is equally a many-headed hydra, with each claim and counterclaim giving birth to dozens of others. And yet among the mountains of material there are few--if any--books that examine the event with the clarity of Peter Knight's book. Knight addresses both the official and unofficial versions, the significance of the assassination in US history, and its impact on American culture, in calm, rational prose that doesn't get bogged down in the excessive detail that threatens to capsize so much writing on the subject. This concise and extremely readable book contains probably all you need to know about the Kennedy assassination. Highly recommended.

5 comments about The Last Investigation.

1. America owes a debt of gratitude to Gaeton Fonzi, former House Select Commitee on Assassinations investigator.
   The HSCA was formed to give we the people the truth about the Asassination Conspiracy of President John F Kennedy, but instead, tons of HSCA documents are sealed away for decades to come!
   What the HSCA didnt want to make too public, and what the media has totally hidden, is that the HSCA investigation proves once and for all that Lee Oswald was being framed for the assassination MONTHS before it happened!
   Gaeton Fonzi is one of the few investigators for the HSCA who has gone against the grain, and who has come out to tell the American People the truth. He did so by writing this book.
   One of the main points of Fonzi's book, is that CIA man "Maurice Bishop", was an alias used by David Atlee Phillips, former head of the CIA's Western Hemisphere division!
   The identity of "Bishop" has long kept JFK assassination researchers interested because "Bishop" was seen with Lee Oswald in Dallas not long before the assassination, proving that the CIA had a link with Oswald, even though they said they didnt.
   Couple this with the fact that Philips ("Bishop") did work for the CIA in Mexico City WHERE AN OSWALD IMPERSONATOR FRAMED HIM (Oswald) BEFORE THE ASSASSINATION, and the JFK murder mystery becomes much clearer.



2. Another good companion volume to Ultimate Sacrifice
   Former Senate investigator Gaeton Fonzi, of whom I have corresponded with, is to be commended for writing an excellent book about the HSCA, Cuba, and the JFK assassination. It is scholarly works like this that give the research community a good name. Get this!
   Vince Palamara
   Secret Service expert, author of 2 books, in over 32 other author's books, History Channel,etc.



3. I highly recommend former HSCA investigator Gaeton Fonzi's book, as it is a great companion volume to Ultimate Sacrifice. Fonzi's book is very well written and put together. You can't go wrong with this one. Get it!
   vince palamara



4. What most attracted me about this book was the fact that its author, Gaeton Fonzi, is an investigator who can write not based on other researchers' data and conclusions, but on the evidence he himself gathered during the House Committee on Assassinations lifetime.
   In this book you will learn about how the CIA planted a fake "communist" Lee Harvey Oswald in Mexico City in order to put the blame on Communists, specifically Fidel Castro. Fonzi greatly reinforced my conviction that the CIA was behind this coup d'etat.



5. This book is extremely well written, which is to be expected, I suppose, since Fonzi is, by trade, a journalist. This book does not focus on the JFK assassination per se, but rather on the mid-1970s congressional investigations of it. To that extent, his story is a fascinating one, and one that is a first-hand account. In addition, the main focus here is US intelligence agencies' involvement in the JFK assassination- one touchy (and important) subject. And while it certainly seems clear that David Phillips lied to Fonzi regarding the identity of Maurice Bishop (an alias that Phillips used), just because Bishop/Phillips was seen in a Dallas lobby talking with Oswald a month before the assassination, it doesn't necessarily mean that Phillips had a hand in the assassination. In fact, in Ultimate Sacrifice, we are led to believe that Phillips was setting Oswald up to be a patsy for an assassination of Castro. (The same could be said of Morales' quote, "We got those little...(expletive)"...referring to JFK and then RFK. The use of 'we' does not establish direct involvement in an assassination. In short, while I sympathize with those working on uncovering a JFK (or RFK) conspiracy, the fact remains that there's very little here that demonstrates direct involvement in the planning and/or carrying out (or covering up) of the JFK assassination (at the end of the book, Fonzi writes that Oswald and Phillips had to be up to something connected with the planning of the JFK assassination because if they weren't, then why would Phillips later lie to him about it? Well...? I can think of a few good reasons...). Garrison's "On the Trail of the Assassins" is far more eye-popping in this important respect. The Last Investigation is, I agree, an important contribution. But, in the end, it's too far removed from the events surrounding November 22nd, 1963 to be considered the smoking gun that conspiracy theorist minded folks like myself yearn for.

No comments about Julius Caesar (The New Cambridge Shakespeare).